The timing and similarity highly suggests this is a problem with how almost all software has implemented the webp standard in its image processing software.

Did you read the article or the post? The point was that both places where the vulnerability was found probably used libwepb. So it’s not that there’s something inherently vulnerable in handling webp, just that they both used the same library which had a vulnerability. (Presumably the article was a little vague about the Apple side because the source wasn’t open/available.)

given that the programs processing images often have escalated privileges.

What? That sounds like a really strange thing to say. I guess one could argue it’s technically true because browsers can be considered “a program that processes images” and a browser component can end up in stuff with escalated privileges. That’s kind of a special case though and in general there’s no reason for the vast majority of programs that process images to have special privileges.

“This time you’re going to love Cortana. For reals!”

People that love to read only the title. What could be better than a bunch of titles in a row?

It’s a briefcase full of cash.

I’m pretty sure you could just say “It’s tax free” or even double the amount to $2 million and it wouldn’t really change which people would do it and which wouldn’t.

I’d do it, as long as I was really convinced that the only danger was mental, not physical.

You probably ate or drank other stuff with water. The other person didn’t mean “water” specifically, just some means of hydration.

They deliberately do that in some public toilets to discourage people from hooking up in there.

You can wing it with baking, at least for some types of stuff. Oatmeal raisin cookies don’t really take precision, as an example.

“They found that in a community of 15,000 electric cars only 1.5 percent of batteries have been replaced if you exclude massive recalls […] The team also points out that most battery replacements happen when the car is still covered by a warranty.”

I’m not sure looking at the stats like that is really all that useful.

There are two situations where the battery replacement happens:

1. The user forks over the money to replace it personally.
2. They manage to convince the manufacturer to cover the cost.

It’s definitely not a given that everyone who wants to replace their battery can and does. This post is about longevity, so presumably most of the time in that situation the person will have to cover the cost of replacement themselves.

I want to be clear, I’m not arguing against EVs. I’m just saying this article doesn’t really have enough information to draw a conclusion.

First, how is this different from having your IDE fill in your loop templates?

I don’t do that actually, but I think there are some differences.

1. One is if there’s a loop template in your IDE, you know it’s going to work. With LLMs you have to double check stuff (or just have it be wrong some of the time).
2. You don’t have to type in a bunch of instructions to use a loop template. You also don’t really have to wait for the filled in template to get generated.
3. People don’t usually use that because they just don’t know how to write the loop themselves, it’s a convenience feature.

That said:

I’m usually doing this for a customer in a language I’ll never use again.

Maybe you’re the one in a million exception where this approach is a benefit. Most of the time when you talk to people on the internet, they’re going to assume you’re a reasonably typical case and not the extremely rare exception.

Right, but you can’t give it the variable names you’re using and have it fill them in, and if you want to do something inside that loop with

Why are you actively trying to avoid learning how to write the loop? Are you planning to have ChatGPT fill in your loop templates for the rest of your life?

But you do you, I’ll keep using ChatGPT and looking like a miracle worker.

It’s going to be slower overall than just using the reference and learning how to do it. I really, really am skeptical that a developer at the level where they need that feature is going to seem like a miracle worker to anyone other than people who are just impressed when you can do anything with a computer.

If I got vored, promptly being upvored seems like the best case scenario.

Eating burgers to destroy the environment was good enough for my pappy and it’s good enough for me! Kids these days with their new-fangled environment destruction techniques. Pshaw.

On a more serious note, people are eager to criticize stuff that has a relatively tiny effect while there’s a much bigger problem they’re part of.

I painted my profile picture a million years ago in another life (sadly back to stick figures these days). I like it enough to use it, even though it has major flaws.

I think you might have misunderstood the post? There wasn’t anything about the manufacturer disabling the radio. The person I replied to said they’d choose not to use the car’s fancy features and I thought it was funny they’d do that to “spite” the manufacturer after giving them a whole bunch of money.

It doesn’t mean doing the exact same thing, it means treating others in the way you’d like to be treated.

Maybe. I feel like it’s going to be kind of hard to make them care if you’re still buying their product though.

Doesn’t the article contradict what you just said?

“We believe, and Apple’s Security Engineering and Architecture team has confirmed to us, that Lockdown Mode blocks this particular attack,” Citizen Lab said.

I’ll plug in my phone, ignore your entire. Infotainment and actively campaign for it to fail and blow up in your face.

This sounds kind of funny. “I’ll spend $60,000 on your car but I won’t turn on the radio. That’ll show you!”

The title makes it sound like Rotten Tomatoes deliberately did something shady. What actually seems to have happened is:

1. Rotten Tomatoes aggregates critic reviews. As far as I know, those critics aren’t really affiliated with Rotten Tomatoes.
2. Some of the critics that make up that aggregated rating got bribed to increase their evaluation of the movie.
3. Consequently the score on sites that aggregate reviews like Rotten Tomatoes increased.

Man, can’t even block the user without blocking all replies too.